Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Among Medicaid Beneficiaries: The Role of Physician Payment and Managed Care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sabik LM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6212332 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Among Medicaid Beneficiaries: The Role of Physician Payment and Managed Care.
Sabik Lindsay M LM Dahman Bassam B Vichare Anushree A Bradley Cathy J CJ
Medical care research and review : MCRR 20180504 1
Medicaid-insured women have low rates of cancer screening. There are multiple policy levers that may influence access to preventive services such as screening, including physician payment and managed care. We examine the relationship between each of these factors and breast and cervical cancer screening among nonelderly nondisabled adult Medicaid enrollees. We combine individual-level data on Medicaid enrollment, demographics, and use of screening services from the Medicaid Analytic eXtract file ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesThis study investigated the relationship between state Medicaid co-payment policies and cancer screening for Medicaid-enrolled women.Study designCross-sectional analysis of administrative claims and enrollment data.MethodsOur data included Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) outpatient claims files across 43 states in 2003, 2008, and 2010, the years for which both MAX data and state cost-sharing data were available. Data on enrollee demographics and screening services from enrollment and claims files were merged with state-year data on co-payment policies and county-level controls from the Area Health Resources File. Participants were nonelderly, nondisabled, nonpregnant women in the recommended age range for each screening service (50-64 years for mammograms; 21-64 years for Pap tests) enrolled in fee-for-service Medicaid. The main independent variable is whether an enrollee faced cost sharing for preventive services. We examined 3 categories of cost sharing: co-payments for all visits, including for preventive services; co-payments for outpatient visits but waived for preventive services; and no co-payments. The main outcome measure was receipt of mammogram or Pap test within a 12-month period.ResultsMedicaid enrollees with co-payments for preventive services were less likely to receive both screening mammograms and Pap tests than enrollees in states not requiring cost sharing for preventive services.ConclusionsCo-payments for preventive services discourage breast and cervical cancer screening among Medicaid enrollees. The effect is larger for breast cancer screening, which is costlier and requires an additional visit. Considering this evidence, cost sharing for preventive services may lead to adverse health consequences and greater long-term costs.
| S-EPMC8011838 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectivesMedicaid programs are not required to pay the full Medicare coinsurance and deductibles for Medicare-Medicaid dually eligible beneficiaries. We examined the association between the percentage of Medicare cost sharing paid by Medicaid and the likelihood that a dually eligible beneficiary used evaluation and management (E&M) services and safety net provider services.Data sourcesMedicare and Medicaid Analytic eXtract enrollment and claims data for 2009.Study designMultivariate analyses used fee-for-service dually eligible and Medicare-only beneficiaries in 20 states. A comparison group of Medicare-only beneficiaries controlled for state factors that might influence utilization.Principal findingsPaying 100 percent of the Medicare cost sharing compared to 20 percent increased the likelihood (relative to Medicare-only) that a dually eligible beneficiary had any E&M visit by 6.4 percent. This difference in the percentage of cost sharing paid decreased the likelihood of using safety net providers, by 37.7 percent for federally qualified health centers and rural health centers, and by 19.8 percent for hospital outpatient departments.ConclusionsReimbursing the full Medicare cost-sharing amount would improve access for dually eligible beneficiaries, although the magnitude of the effect will vary by state and type of service.
| S-EPMC5682139 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the impact of Medicaid managed care organizations (MCO) on health care access for adults with disabilities (AWDs).Mandatory and voluntary enrollment data for AWDs in Medicaid MCOs in each county were merged with the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and the Area Resource File for 1996-2004.I use logit regression and two evaluation perspectives to compare access and preventive care for AWDs in Medicaid MCOs with FFS. From the state's perspective, I compare AWDs in counties with mandatory, voluntary, and no MCOs. From the enrollee's perspective, I compare AWDs who must enroll in an MCO or FFS to those who may choose between them.Mandatory MCO enrollees are 24.9 percent more likely to wait >30 minutes to see a provider, 32 percent more likely to report a problem accessing a specialist, and 10 percent less likely to receive a flu shot within the past year. These differences persist from the state evaluation perspective.States should not expect a dramatic change in health care access when they implement Medicaid MCOs to deliver care to the adult disabled population. However, continued attention to specialty care access is warranted for mandatory MCO enrollees.
| S-EPMC2754546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased 2013 to 2014 Medicaid payment rates for qualifying primary care physicians (PCPs) and services to higher Medicare payment levels, with the goal of improving primary care access for Medicaid enrollees.ObjectivesTo evaluate the payment increase policy and to assess whether it was associated with changes in Medicaid participation rates or Medicaid service volume among PCPs.Design, setting, and participantsThis study used 2012 to 2015 IMS Health aggregated medical claims and encounter data from PCPs eligible for the payment increase practicing in all states except Alaska and Hawaii and included 20 723 PCPs with observations in each month from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2015. Data are for professional services performed in ambulatory settings, including office, hospital outpatient department, and emergency department. Regression models were used to test whether outcomes differed in months subject to higher payment rates relative to months before the increase and after the expiration of the increase in some states. The models controlled for time-invariant physician characteristics and time-varying characteristics, such as Medicaid enrollment. Interaction terms were included to estimate differential associations in subgroups of states (eg, by Medicaid managed care penetration) and physicians (eg, by specialty).Main outcomes and measuresPhysician-month records subject to higher Medicaid payment rates were flagged using state-specific implementation and end dates for the payment increase. Five outcomes were measured for each physician-month observation, including (1) an indicator for seeing any patients enrolled in Medicaid, (2) an indicator for seeing more than 5 patients enrolled in Medicaid, (3) the Medicaid share of total patients, (4) a count of new patient evaluation and management visits furnished to patients enrolled in Medicaid, and (5) a count of existing patient evaluation and management visits furnished to patients enrolled in Medicaid.ResultsAmong 20 723 PCPs, the payment increase had no association with PCP participation in Medicaid or Medicaid service volume. The estimated average marginal effects for all 5 outcomes were not statistically distinguishable from 0. This null result was robust to sensitivity analyses, including different time trend specifications and analyses focusing on the payment increase implementation and expiration time frames. Descriptively, the Medicaid share of patients increased by about 25% from 2012 to 2015, although the share did not increase differentially in states and months subject to higher payment rates.Conclusions and relevanceThe limited duration and design of the payment increase may have dampened its effectiveness. Future efforts to improve access through payment changes or other means can benefit from better understanding of the outcomes of this policy.
| S-EPMC6143101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a telephone care management intervention to increase the use of primary and preventive care, reduce hospital admissions, and reduce emergency department visits for Medicaid beneficiaries with disabilities in a managed care setting. DATA SOURCE: Four years (2007-2011) of Medicaid claims data on blind and/or disabled beneficiaries, aged 20-64. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized control trial with an intervention group (n = 3,540) that was enrolled in managed care with telephone care management and a control group (n = 1,524) who remained in fee-for-service system without care management services. Multi-disciplinary care coordination teams provided telephone services to the intervention group to address patients' medical and social needs. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION: Medicaid claims and encounter data for all participants were obtained from the state and the managed care organization. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There was no significant difference in use of primary care, specialist visits, hospital admissions, and emergency department between the intervention and the control group. Care managers experienced challenges in keeping members engaged in the intervention and maintaining contact by telephone. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of success for Medicaid beneficiaries, along with other recent studies, suggests that more intensive and more targeted interventions may be more effective for the high-needs population.
| S-EPMC3796111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated a 14-county quality improvement program of care delivery and payment of a dental care organization for child and adolescent managed care Medicaid beneficiaries after 2 years of implementation.MethodsCounties were randomly assigned to either the intervention (PREDICT) or control group. Using Medicaid administrative data, difference-in-difference regression models were used to estimate PREDICT intervention effects (formally, "average marginal effects") on dental care utilization and costs to Medicaid, controlling for patient and county characteristics.ResultsAverage marginal effects of PREDICT on expected use and expected cost of services per patient (child or adolescent) per quarter were small and insignificant for most service categories. There were statistically significant effects of PREDICT (p < .05), though still small, for certain types of service: (1) Expected number of diagnostic services per patient-quarter increased by .009 units; (2) Expected number of sealants per patient-quarter increased by .003 units, and expected cost by $0.06; (3) Total expected cost per patient-quarter for all services increased by $0.64. These consistent positive effects of PREDICT on diagnostic and certain preventive services (i.e., sealants) were not accompanied by increases in more costly service types (i.e., restorations) or extractions.ConclusionThe major hypothesis that primary dental care (selected preventive services and diagnostic services in general) would increase significantly over time in PREDICT counties relative to controls was supported. There were small but statistically significant, increases in differential use of diagnostic services and sealants. Total cost per beneficiary rose modestly, but restorative and dental costs did not. The findings suggest favorable developments within PREDICT counties in enhanced preventive and diagnostic procedures, while holding the line on expensive restorative and extraction procedures.
| S-EPMC8188686 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Out-of-network emergency department (ED) use, or use that occurs outside the contracted network, may lead to increased care fragmentation and cost. We examined factors associated with out-of-network ED use among Medicaid beneficiaries.Enrollment, claims, and encounter data for adult Medi-Cal health plan members with 1+ ED visits and complete Medicaid eligibility during the study period from 2013 to 2014.We analyzed the data to identify factors associated with out-of-network ED use classified by mode of arrival (ambulance vs. nonambulance).We extracted encounter, ambulance, and ED census data and linked them together based on ED visit date.Of 11,143 ED visits, 6,808 (61.1 percent) were out-of-network. The number of hours the study ED was on ambulance diversion increased the odds of out-of-network visits for the 3,365 (30.2 percent) ED visits arriving by ambulance. For all visit types, assignment to a primary care clinic at the in-network hospital and having had any primary care visit during the study period decreased the odds of out-of-network ED care. Individuals were more likely to go out-of-network for ED care if they lived in neighborhoods containing out-of-network EDs.There are a number of factors related to out-of-network ED use, including the proximity and density of out-of-network EDs, race and ethnicity, a prior history of out-of-network ED use, and individuals' connection to primary care. EDs that serve Medicaid beneficiaries may need to explore alternative sites and modalities of care as alternatives to the ED, and consider their ability to absorb large numbers of out-of-network visits given already limited capacity.
| S-EPMC5682123 | biostudies-other
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the effect of the 2014 Medicaid expansion on Medicaid managed care plan quality. DATA SOURCES:Three composite measures of plan-level quality constructed from the Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set. STUDY SETTING:One hundred and sixty-three plans in 27 Medicaid expansion states and 100 plans in 14 nonexpansion states. STUDY DESIGN:Quasi-experimental difference-in-differences (DID) analysis, comparing quality before (2011-13) and after (2014-15) Medicaid expansion in states that elected to expand Medicaid eligibility and those that did not. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Mean plan enrollment increased from 130,533 to 274,259 in expansion states and from 105,449 to 148,194 in nonexpansion states. The proportion of enrollees receiving recommended preventive care increased from 62.6 to 65.2 percent in expansion states and from 59.3 to 62.5 percent in nonexpansion states (adjusted DID: -0.7 percentage points [95% CI -2.2, 0.7]). The proportion of enrollees receiving recommended chronic disease care management increased from 65.4 to 66.0 percent in expansion states and from 62.5 to 63.1 percent in nonexpansion states (adjusted DID: 1.1 percentage points [95% CI -0.5, 2.6]). We observed similar patterns for the receipt of recommended maternity care. CONCLUSIONS:Medicaid expansion increased enrollment in managed care plans, but it did not result in erosion of quality.
| S-EPMC6056574 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo resolve a conflict in the literature on whether Medicaid-Managed Care (MMC) impacts the Medicaid Undercount.Data sources/study settingCalifornia county-level data (1995-1997) on MMC penetration, public use data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) (1995-1997), and restricted CPS data matched to administrative records on Medicaid enrollment (2001-2002).Study designWe explore the robustness of previous results from the literature first using aggregate data and alternative models. We then examine CPS data linked to Medicaid enrollment data to estimate models of Medicaid reporting errors related to MMC.Data collection/extraction methodsThe Census Bureau linked administrative data on Medicaid enrollment to the CPS. Other data used were public use.Principal findingsWe find similar results to a previous study using aggregate data that suggest that MMC worsens reporting of Medicaid enrollment. However, using alternative methods we find those results are not statistically significant and can have opposite signs. Our linked CPS microdata analysis suggests that MMC improves reporting. The article concludes with implications of these results for policy makers.ConclusionIt is unlikely that increased MMC penetration explains the increased Medicaid Undercount.
| S-EPMC2965506 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceManaged care payment formulas commonly allocate more money for medically complex populations, but ignore most social determinants of health (SDH).ObjectiveTo add SDH variables to a diagnosis-based payment formula that allocates funds to managed care plans and accountable care organizations.Design, setting, and participantsUsing data from MassHealth, the Massachusetts Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program, we estimated regression models predicting Medicaid spending using a diagnosis-based and SDH-expanded model, and compared the accuracy of their cost predictions overall and for vulnerable populations. MassHealth members enrolled for at least 6 months in 2013 in fee-for-service (FFS) programs (n = 357 660) or managed care organizations (MCOs) (n = 524 607).ExposuresWe built cost prediction models from a fee-for-service program. Predictors in the diagnosis-based model are age, sex, and diagnoses from claims. The SDH model adds predictors describing housing instability, behavioral health issues, disability, and neighborhood-level stressors.Main outcomes and measuresOverall model explanatory power and overpayments and underpayments for subgroups of interest for all Medicaid-reimbursable expenditures excepting long-term support services (mean annual cost = $5590 per member).ResultsWe studied 357 660 people who were FFS participants and 524 607 enrolled in MCOs with a combined 806 889 person-years of experience. The FFS program experience included more men (49.6% vs 43.6%), older patients (mean age of 26.1 years vs 21.6 years), and sicker patients (mean morbidity score of 1.16 vs 0.89) than MCOs. Overall, the SDH model performed well, but only slightly better than the diagnosis-based model, explaining most of the spending variation in the managed care population (validated R2 = 62.4) and reducing underpayments for several vulnerable populations. For example, raw costs for the quintile of people living in the most stressed neighborhoods were 9.6% ($537 per member per year) higher than average. Since greater medical morbidity accounts for much of this difference, the diagnosis-based model underpredicts costs for the most stressed quintile by about 2.1% ($130 per member per year). The expanded model eliminates the neighborhood-based underpayment, as well as underpayments of 72% for clients of the Department of Mental Health (observed costs of about $30 000 per year) and of 7% for those with serious mental illness (observed costs of about $16 000 per year).Conclusions and relevanceSince October 2016, MassHealth has used an expanded model to allocate payments from a prespecified total budget to managed care organizations according to their enrollees' social and medical risk. Extra payments for socially vulnerable individuals could fund activities, such as housing assistance, that could improve health equity.
| S-EPMC5710209 | biostudies-literature